 |
In an article that appeared on Gorkana PR today, long time PR Terence Gibbons muses on the relative merits of PR courses…or not.
While Gibbons does say that he would "hate to panic hardworking students just about to complete a dollop of course work, or the tutor whose job depends on another intake of freshers on a “PR/Media” BA", it actually looks like he is going to upset anyone teaching or studying PR at graduate level, which is a lot of people:
"The only way to “get into PR”, is having a passion for it. Nobody “gets” into PR. You “get into” organic chemistry. You get into “organic yoghurt”. You get into “your music”. You get into a Porsche. But, you aspire to work in PR. As such, a PR degree seems to be of limited use."
Wise words on the aspirational aspect of working in PR, but still feel he is giving a harsh view on PR degrees as of "limited use".
"You can develop any talent within, hone and craft skills but if someone can’t write good copy or prose, it can’t be taught. You either have a natural talent for it or not. You can learn the techniques, but unless your interest lies in the whole fascinating subject that is human psychology, its manipulation, the creation of thought contagion and mind viruses, forget it. Can you teach someone to sell a story? Can you teach someone to be innovative? To be creative? Can you teach someone to have a flair for publicity? For spotting trends before they happen? Personally, I don’t think so."
True, but PR degrees give students plenty of real world situations where they can apply the skills they have learnt, not to mention the work placements that they often undertake. I think Gibbons is alluding to his very high standards here, and why not? PR students should learn from his comments and strive to attain these high standards too.
His example of a PR student takes on a more sarcastic tone:
"I have worked with PR Graduates. For example, Ermintrude. Ermintrude is a PR graduate of a very large new University that is well known for its “innovative” approach to PR degrees and now works in a large consumer plc. She has completed her 3-year course of study and has acquired “all the skills for PR” and the degree to prove it. Yet, she doesn’t know what a stand first is or what the 20-word rule is. Or what “forward features” or “selling in” consist of. She knows the theory of mass communication, has read Chomsky, but she flounders when the technique of selling a story to a hung-over reporter on the Times Business section is required. She reads well but is unable to spot trends. She writes like she is still on a student newspaper. Bless.
Ermintrude is a composite of course. Yet I’ve experienced all the above from PR graduates. Many PR degree courses are oversold and offer few practical advantages in securing a job in a cool agency or in a tip-top job in house. Very few have lecturers who’ve worked anywhere in the industry from what I can see. PR needs creative individuals who also happen to have the gift of organising and selling a story. It’s really that simple. No need to intellectualise it."
Here, I think Gibbons lets slip his poor knowledge of the current state of PR degrees. These courses are improving all the time, listening to their students and current PR practitioners to improve upon their offerings, matching both the demands of the graduates and of the job market they will be entering in to. Graduates from these courses are often more prepared for PR2.0 than their more senior colleagues given that they are 'digital natives'.
However, for all the criticism that Gibbons will come in for over this article, I happen to agree with his finishing paragraph:
"My advice to anyone wanting to “get into PR” is to increase your areas of interest/expertise and widen your knowledge of business. Do short course. Do PR for a local charity free of charge. Work in an agency on your day off. It’ll give you more experience of PR than a thousand PR “degrees”. And you can also avoid those “Work in PR” type ads in the Guardian."
So yet another confusing article that will worry those hoping to "get into" PR - especially those studying for a PR degree now. But for all Gibbons' harsher points, it may be a strong dose of reality for those looking for jobs in the PR industry about what senior PR executives are expecting from them.
Personally, I may not have the most authority on this subject as I took the student journalism route into PR. But I'd really like to hear what the current crop of PR students and their tutors have to say about Gibbons' views. And just so he can see the talent that is coming through the ranks on the courses he dismisses, here is a list of excellent PR students and their tutors who would be happy to tell him the worth of PR degrees:
11 comments:
(Via email)
That's fun. I don't even disagree too vehemently.
But I also recognise that times change. Would I have studied history had I been faced with loans to cover my university fees? Maybe I'd have been more vocational in my choice of course.
Public relations is a popular vocational course (one of many; people are now graduating with events management degrees etc etc). The degree doesn't guarantee a job in PR or anywhere else, just as my history degree wasn't a route into the civil service.
Employers should still choose the best candidates who may or may not be graduates in this discipline. The best graduates should certainly equip themselves with work experience. On its own, a PR degree is of limited value. To that extent I agree with this author.
Thanks for drawing this to my attention.
Richard
Gibbons accomplished his point of writing this article. He put fire under those of us working toward a PR degree. He did a great job of it too; because I know my fellow classmates and myself have worked very hard to get where we are today, this will only make us want to prove him wrong.
Now I cannot account for other universities, but the University of Oregon (UO) has an amazing Public Relations faculty. I believe one of the reasons the students do so well is because of our instructor Kelli Matthews. She graduated from UO with her BA and MA and started her own PR firm. She is young and relates to her students unlike any other professor I’ve met, mainly because she was just in our shoes recently. There is a difference in teaching methods. When I need to ask Kelli a question she had given me 3 different email accounts, 2 blogs, her MSN messenger, her IM screen name, her Skype account and her twitter name. She makes herself available through social media, which forces us as student to check it out and join in. These are the things I’m learning, which will make my PR degree worth more than just a Journalism degree.
To say something can’t be taught is ridiculous. It only means you do not wish to try. You teach skill through experience. That is why we had weekly homework assignments.
Gibbons even says it at the end that the only way to “get into PR” is to experience it whether it is working for non-profit. Either way it is the experience that drives you. My best PR experience has been working for our student-run firm. It’s the experience of writing blogs each week, interacting with professionals on twitter, and podcasting that will make my degree worth something.
Because I’m taking the time to educate myself outside of the classroom on social media and web2.0 I will be ready in four months to begin looking for my first PR job. I know that when I walk in on my first day I will be confident because my instructors pushed me to a limit. It takes getting and F on your first paper because of one minor grammar mistake to make me realize the wealth of knowledge I gain from my PR degree.
Thank you Gibbons for Lighting the fire.. Because Here I come.
Terence Gibbons' strategy in the article is to use anecdotal self-created metaphors. Gee, how convenient. True, many of his "Ermintrude" examples seem real enough.
Is he suggesting that he's never experienced the same from non-college grads as he has from Ermintrude? I doubt his experiences are solely confined to college grad new hires.
Still, like so many articles in the past, this shows how far we have to go in order to gain appreciation for PR higher education from some old-schoolers.
Forgive the pun ... The proof will be in the pudding - our graduates. They are already changing minds and attitudes - for the better - every day.
Lastly, I hope the irony of a critic of higher education PR working for a firm called "College Hill Associates" is not lost on anyone.
Perhaps Gibbons thinks merely the use of the word "college" is sufficient to add legitimacy and gravitas to his firm's standing. Perhaps he just likes the name, but doesn't want to go to class. Over here, we call that kind of thinking ... lazy.
As I read your post, I did not panic, as Terence Gibbons suggested I might. Rather, my heart sank and my blood pressure rose at the same time.
As you noted, I am currently a student in Public Relations. I will also begin a Masters degree in Communications and Technology in May. The mere thought that this education might be of 'limited use' to me is absurd.
First of all, I disagree that you don't 'get into' PR. I believe upi do, just like any other passion or position. The term implies the act of immersing or surrounding oneself with something - personally, I think I've 'gotten into' PR. Even if he happens to be referring to 'the industry' that is also something you need to 'get into'. More and more it seems it is beneficial to be able to state that you have some formal training in public relations in order to gain a position in the industry. Either that, or experience and as most of us know, that's a bit of a catch 22.
My other issue with the devaluing of formal PR training is that very rarely is the knowledge gained from these programs strictly public relations based. Most often the students gain skills in networking, time management, problem solving and critical thinking. I think Mr. Gibbons would be hard pressed to find a PR student who didn't also have at least some of these useful attributes.
I think Gibbons is unfairly pigeon-holing PR students and quite frankly, comments such as these do nothing but fuel my curiousity to learn more and prove him wrong.
-Kerri
Hi All,
Thanks for all your comments. It's interesting to hear the differing reactions from PR tutors, and the fire in the belly from PR students to prove themselves!
@Richard Bailey - interesting the way you suggest that a PR degree has as much value as any other degree in terms of getting a job in PR, but it's what you do with it and the experience you gain around it that counts. A call to action for those currently studying for a degree in PR and for those who aren't but would like a career in the industry.
@Staci Stringer - I'm glad this post inspired you! You are at an advantage to other students as you have experience of what day-to-day life at an agency entails. Your PR degree gives you a lot of useful skills, but if someone cannot apply these skills to daily life in an agency then they lose their value.
@Robert - I agree with you, the current activities of PR students proves Gibbons wrong. But what abut the students who aren't active, the Ermintrude's of your course? Do they prove Gibbon's correct?
@PRKeener - Good point about the other skills gained. Gibbons ignores these valuable skills and even if a PR student doesn't eventually pursue a career in PR, their skills are useful in a wide variety of industries, not to mention day to day life.
I wonder if Mr. gibbons has read these comments?
First off, I wanted to thank you recognizing my work.
Secondly, as a PR student in my second to last term in the University of Oregon's PR program, I am hesitant to say that a PR degree is the best route to take if working for an agency is not in your future.
I have spoken with several students who feel that, if you do not want to go to work for an agency, the skills learned in the major are simply a solid foundation. For those who do want to go to work for an agency, the major is perfect. PR teaches how to create necessary professional documents that PR pros create in everyday.
But for students like myself that are not cut out for agency work, the job hunt becomes much more difficult. A lot of positions that I want to apply for overlap with marketing and advertising jobs, which makes me feel like I am caught in the middle and that I am not as marketable as students with other degrees.
Anyone involved in PR has come across the negative stereotype that PR has. And in business setting, employers have trouble seeing how an entry-level PR person will benefit the company over an ad or marketing person.
Bottom line: It is good to stick with PR, but there are a lot of students - me included - who need more skills to allow themselves to stand out from the rest of the those job seekers.
@PRMagnet - I think your doing yourself a disservice. I'm sure your PR tutor would be more than willing to point out the skills you have that apply to areas outside of the marketing mix (PR, Marketing and Advertising).
Communication is a vital aspect of today's business environment, an area that as a PR student you should be strong in. Good writing skills is a valuable asset that a surprising number of people don't have. Research should also be a strong skill, along with filtering information into a manageable and sellable form, which is what you basically do when writing a pres release.
And some of the other skills that Kerri points out - networking, time management, problem solving and critical thinking - are all skills valuable for a wide range of industries other than PR.
I think that you have more than enough ammunition to overcome any bad stereotypes, and there are plenty of PR people who will give you even more.
Ben, the Ermintrude examples can be found in any group of students, employees ... any group.
Gibbons' attempt at a universal condemnation employs stereotypes. He could have found those same, or similar, inequities in many PRs - even ones with tenure.
Gibbons is more guilty of his contrived stereotype characteristics than any Ermintrude. He belies his own "limited use". In short, some of what he said had merit, but he let it get lost in a flawed argument.
This post made Jo's top 5. http://strivepr.com/wordpress/2008/03/12/march-13-jos-pr-top-5/
That is true. I do have several valuable skills. I guess I should have not been as general about my feelings towards the major. Having almost completed the PR major, I guess that for my career aspirations I will need more education.
Many PR degree courses are oversold and offer few practical advantages in securing a job in a cool agency or in a tip-top job in house.
Interesting points that Gibbons makes. However I would have to disagree with this totally when considering the PR course I am in.
Currently us first-year PR students are organizing a fundraiser (the 20th annual I might add) for our college. The previous 19 have raised over $126,000 to local charities. I would consider that quite practical experience.
As well in second-year we have a seven-week placement in the field. Many of time this leads to full-time employment.
Sometimes generalizations shouldn't be made about the practical experience gained in PR...don't you think :)?
Post a Comment